It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

18 CEOs Called Out By Bernie Sanders

page: 18
67
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

You know -I- would not do that.

But - too many people would. Helps them sleep better at night, I guess?




posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Exactly. The reason it won't happen is because people choose to lose by not trying.

That doesn't mean it's easy or that it will happen for sure. But to not try is to beat yourself.

If you were swimming in the ocean and you saw a shark swimming after you would you not still try and swim to safety even if it was unlikely that you would make it??? Would you just bob there in the water and say I'll never make it???



Here's the hope I have for winning while losing. I still think clinton or Bush, I still think Sanders, trump, and of course us write in voters have no chance.

My hope is that excluding write in people like me. That if Sanders and trump don't get the nods they run as 3rd and 4th party. They won't win. But my hope is that the vote is so thin between the democrats and republicans that Bush/Gore is a cake walk. I honestly hope 10 votes is the difference between the winner and loser. Maybe, just maybe at this point both parties take a timeout and do some real changes to give them reasons to vote for them again and avoid a mess like that going forward.

Don't stop trying, because even in the loss it could have a win to it. At the moment though, it's all I can see as a hopeful postive. They don't change do it again next election. Eventually they might get the message.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Reallyfolks

Glad we got that cleared up...you do realize that Bernie would not be opposed to your 25 or 50 hard limit, right?



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

If Bernie came out with that proposal I would do what I said I would never do. I would become a single issue voter. I would ignore any other problems I see with what he wants, I would throw out any reservations. To me if that were implemented it would be the greatest political equalizer we have seen. It would be worth anything else.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Reallyfolks

Have you actually looked at his stances and platform? Read them?
I think possibly you are missing a lot of what he's saying.

berniesanders.com...



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Yeah, I just signed up to volunteer in a campaign office role. YOU, TOO can sign up to support Bernie!


edit on 9/7/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)

See the link in my last post, and click on "Volunteer". It's easy peasy. Make a difference!!

edit on 9/7/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 11:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Reallyfolks

Have you actually looked at his stances and platform? Read them?
I think possibly you are missing a lot of what he's saying.

berniesanders.com...


Here's my overall problem. What he wants take a lot of money. Correct me if I'm wrong but he had a proposal to deal with that by implementing a small tax on each wall street trade. That's great. But not only do we currently have 18 trillion in debt, we have 127 trillion with a T in unfunded liabilities coming due in the next couple of decades. I think that works out to each tax payer owing 1.1 million dollars. So not only do I need to see something for the now but we are about to hit a fiscal cliff. Add to that automation/robotics coming online we will have large job losses and less tax base. Tpp? How many outsourced jobs etc? Basically I see less money available, even less going forward, 18 and 127 trillion respectively, and what appears to be solving a a small part of the overall problem on a temporary basis. Which will add to the debit and unfunded liabilities that are coming due. We are in a world of hurt, it will get extremely ugly. We can't have short election cycle solutions anymore.

I appreciate the overall theme of his campaign. In this day and age who honestly doesn't support forget the 1% concentrate on the 99% policies. I certainly do even if the evil S word is associated with it. I just see a fiscal cliff, will be hitting us, definately the next generation very hard yet it's being ignored for the 4 year solutions of getting elected.

The problem is no one is talking to me on this level. As I said I appreciate the hell out of Sanders and trump. The monkey wrenches they are throwing in the works are a thing of beauty. Heck they run as 3rd and 4th parties I will throw money their way even though I won't vote for either. Just me and my opinion though.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Reallyfolks

Well, at least you're willing to try. Yes, he has suggested a tiny fraction of Wall Street trading to be put to 'taxes'.
If we can't get the $15 minimum wage thing (although there've been major victories in that fight this year as well)....at least we can put fees on the "pay to play" gambit....

If the US is going to host a casino like Wall Street, it's no different than state lotteries... You BUY your ticket. Then you might win, or you might not.

But you have to BUY your ticket. Currently, Wall Street isn't paying to play. They're just playing. And running around figuring out how not to 'pay'. (And, they're winning....WHY?)

Lotteries put ALL of the accumulated funds from people buying tickets toward worthwhile things like schools, roads, etc.
But the way most common-folk investors 'pay' to play to on Wall Street is by paying some "hedge fund manager". THAT, to me, is a travesty. No....no stupid "manager" should be getting 'paid' to pick good funds. That's putting in a corrupt middle-man, rather than just giving the 'investment' directly to the 'racket' one prefers.

I mean, if you could hire a guy who is a professional card counter or statistician to walk around with you at a casino (or better yet, go in your place and play by proxy), would the casinos allow that? No. No, they wouldn't.

Just ask Donald, if you don't believe me. He knows about casinos, from what I hear. He knows how to work the bankruptcy junket, too!...and most of all.....

CHINA!!

edit on 9/7/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Understood. And don't get me wrong I am in no way linking Sanders and trump, except they are both throwing monkey wrenches in their parties and that's great. They are as different as night and day and I realize that.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Reallyfolks

So, cool....but - didn't you just say you wouldn't vote anyway? Is that what you meant??

As I said I appreciate the hell out of Sanders and trump. The monkey wrenches they are throwing in the works are a thing of beauty.
Indeed.


Heck they run as 3rd and 4th parties I will throw money their way even though I won't vote for either. Just me and my opinion though.


You would throw money at them, but not vote for them?




posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Reallyfolks

So, cool....but - didn't you just say you wouldn't vote anyway? Is that what you meant??

As I said I appreciate the hell out of Sanders and trump. The monkey wrenches they are throwing in the works are a thing of beauty.
Indeed.


Heck they run as 3rd and 4th parties I will throw money their way even though I won't vote for either. Just me and my opinion though.


You would throw money at them, but not vote for them?



Ill vote, I'm just a write in voter. If no one is addressing my concerns as I laid out above, I'll just write who who I admire for whatever reason.

Yes if they run third and 4th parties I will throw money at them to help them continue to throw monkey wrenches. But they don't address my concerns so won't vote for them. Odd I know, but we all have our oddities.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Reallyfolks

nah, I understand. My husband is the same way. He only goes to vote so he can write in "they all suck", or to vote against someone who has really pissed him off.....

I used to think it might be a good idea to just write in "I was here"..... I thought it would make a difference if everyone showed up but no one chose a candidate.....
and then I found out that if NO ONE votes for the actual candidates (or don't vote at all), Congress gets to decide!!!

And......well, NOoooooooo!!!!!


Thanks for the conversation, at least.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Reallyfolks

nah, I understand. My husband is the same way. He only goes to vote so he can write in "they all suck", or to vote against someone who has really pissed him off.....

I used to think it might be a good idea to just write in "I was here"..... I thought it would make a difference if everyone showed up but no one chose a candidate.....
and then I found out that if NO ONE votes for the actual candidates (or don't vote at all), Congress gets to decide!!!

And......well, NOoooooooo!!!!!


Thanks for the conversation, at least.




Yes I have selected my two write in candidates. If I want to do the "they all suck" I will write in the name Monty Brewster. It was a character Richard Pryor played in a movie called brewsters millions. Short story he had to blow 30 million dollars so launched a campaign for "none of the above" so if I want to match your husband's option I have one picked and I completely understand him and why he does it.

We all have and see the problems, we just address it in our own ways, and thats cool. Maybe one day



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Metallicus


How many jobs do these companies provide? How many families rely on these jobs?

I don't know...you'd have to ask the people in call centers in India, or the wage-workers in China or Bangladesh.


Verizon and Time Warner do not outsource call centers. I'm pretty sure Bank of America does not either, but I could be wrong there. I know people who work in BOA call centers.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: whatmakesyouright

Here's what I just found...within 10 seconds of reading your post:

A SAMPLING OF U.S. COMPANIES THAT SEND CALL CENTER WORK OFFSHORE

BOA is on the list.

Verizon and Time Warner don't? Good for them.

The huge banks do. So does T-Mobile, and Hewlett Packard (Fiorina, isn't it?)....


ETA: Ok, just checked Time Warner, and apparently they don't (from a 'jobs' board for them)....except....wait! A couple of years ago I got a new digital box from TWC and could'nt get it to work properly. So, I called. I got some guy who was obviously in India, who kept saying 'press noomersine!"....... and I kept saying "what is Noomersine?" and finally I figured out he was talking about the Pound Sign...

Yeah, that guy was DEFINITELY not in the US.


and, Verizon?
Yes, they do:
www.verizon.com...
edit on 9/7/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: whatmakesyouright

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Metallicus


How many jobs do these companies provide? How many families rely on these jobs?

I don't know...you'd have to ask the people in call centers in India, or the wage-workers in China or Bangladesh.


Verizon and Time Warner do not outsource call centers. I'm pretty sure Bank of America does not either, but I could be wrong there. I know people who work in BOA call centers.


As a former site director for an outsourced Time Warner Cable call center, as well as having several peers that worked in outsourced Verizon call centers, I can tell you you are 100%, absolutely, without any shred of doubt wrong.

Running a call center operation is expensive unless you are working a certain volume. It gets far cheaper when you have 5000 seats thrown into the mix. But if you are one of those 20k seat giants you have tons to benefit by off shoring even only 10% of your volume.

But even without off shoring...domestic outsourcing can be done for about 80 cents a handle minute. Compared to the enormous and inflexible salaries of your own team...especially if you have seasonal or volatile volume....its a real bargain.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: jacobe001

Anyone who wants to verify this can go to opensecrets.org to see who his suporters are. I did and he is clean.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 04:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Reflection

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: mOjOm

What part of "top 1% pays 45% of taxes while 48% of America pays negative net taxes" equates to the wealthy being the ones not paying their "fair share?"


Because they're not paying their fair share to their employees. How on earth is anyone supposed to meet their very basic needs and pay taxes if they're not making anywhere close to $15 per hour?


The sense of entitlement....it is a very poor basis for a political belief.


Yeah it is!

Bascially rob more worthless paper from the rich, give that worthless paper to the poor, so they can go out, and buy more stuff made in China.

It's also what I call the ID complex. The I want it all, I want it now, and don't give a crap crowd.

A condition where rational thought from the Ego, and Super Ego never enters in to it.
edit on 7-9-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: mOjOm

What part of "top 1% pays 45% of taxes while 48% of America pays negative net taxes" equates to the wealthy being the ones not paying their "fair share?"


Ain't it 'funny' how the Sanders, and the rest of them never talk about this.



Their solution is just to create taxes,raise them, and take from one group, and giving it to another group.

Fixing the money, and abolishing the income would be a 'stimulus' the likes this country has never seen.

Hell there wouldn't even bee the 'need' for the bloated social programs we have either.



posted on Sep, 7 2015 @ 04:54 PM
link   
The thing is, when you examine what Bernie Sanders is talking about (for the most part, anyway), it isn't really that far off from libertarianism. I guess his healthcare beliefs aren't..but a broad majority of his positions would likely yield quite a bit more fiscal conservatism than any person currently holding public office. The rub for most conservatives is that it will come at a cost of military spending. Which, for some unknown reason, is like manna to the GOP and its base. Maybe because our political system is nothing more than theater to play out the decades old Nazy vs Communist drama.

In any event...i find very little to object to in his actually stated positions. My complaint is about his cult following, and how they make outlandish claims. "If elected Bernie is going to give every person in America a backrub every night". It is like the whole Obama cult....they made outlandish claims about what he was intending, showing that they had no idea what was actually going on.

To get my vote, his biggest obstacle is the sheer volume of morons I know personally who have bought into the cult, and have started making outlandish claims (often contradicting his own stated opinion). Not that you have to be a moron to buy into him...like I said, he is fairly libertarian in his outlook.

ETA: Oh...yeah...and the $15 minimum wage If that happens, most people I know will be made instantly "poor" as they will be making minimum wage (where right now they make double minimum wage, and actually have a decent 2 income household kind of life). I don't want friends/family who make a decent life for themselves at $14.50/hr to be moved from "lower middle class" to "poor" with one fell swoop.
edit on 9/7/2015 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
67
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join